MMF/Moriaty claimform - old Cash Genie PDL

[AndyOrch]

It all depends on the District Judge on the day with and their commitment to the CCA1974 regards to issuance of the default notice and section 87...whether they sent one is irrelevant IMHO opinion as long as they can prove from their audit trail one was issued in line with any breach.

 

I have never referred to No default no case ...not sure where thats come from.:?

 

Creditors are not or never been required to retain a copy of the physical default notice....as long as their internal accounting proves it was issued.

 

With regards to who do you send a section 77/78/9 request......in line with the legislation.

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement.

 

(1)The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [F1£1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

 

Under normal circumstances in which the request would be made there would be no Solicitor so it obviously has to go to the creditor.

 

During litigation...as per the court claim form N1...Address to send documents and payments if different from above (Solicitors details) it is feasible to send the request to them depending on which Solicitor is acting.

 

It has been known for them to Ignore the request...respond stating they are not the creditor therefore the request is invalid or simply they do not pass it on to the creditor...so better to be safe than sorry and just send it to the Organ grinder not the monkey...then there can be no disputing it was sent.

 

Anyway well done for standing your ground and as you state back to status quo with regards the debt...and for the claimant simply a waste of time...a result they could have achieved without litigation.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

[newdad]

see red highlghts.... I was at the mercy of the judge lottery, but it's an indictment of our legal system if Judges are allowed to disregard civil law when it's presented to them in black & white, what's the point in having them?

 

It all depends on the District Judge on the day with and their commitment to the CCA1974 regards to issuance of the default notice and section 87...whether they sent one is irrelevant IMHO opinion as long as they can prove from their audit trail one was issued in line with any breach. no audit trail...nothing

 

I have never referred to No default no case ...not sure where thats come from.:? it's referred to numerous times in these threads by members and site team members, and needs to be corrected

 

Creditors are not or never been required to retain a copy of the physical default notice....as long as their internal accounting proves it was issued. again, no proof offered in this case

With regards to who do you send a section 77/78/9 request......in line with the legislation. i sent it to the OC, judge said this was wrong

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement.

 

(1)The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [F1£1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

 

Under normal circumstances in which the request would be made there would be no Solicitor so it obviously has to go to the creditor.

 

During litigation...as per the court claim form N1...Address to send documents and payments if different from above (Solicitors details) it is feasible to send the request to them depending on which Solicitor is acting. i sent a cca request (still outstanding) to the OC prior to court claim but judge wasn't interested

 

It has been known for them to Ignore the request...respond stating they are not the creditor therefore the request is invalid or simply they do not pass it on to the creditor...so better to be safe than sorry and just send it to the Organ grinder not the monkey...then there can be no disputing it was sent.

 

Anyway well done for standing your ground and as you state back to status quo with regards the debt...and for the claimant simply a waste of time...a result they could have achieved without litigation.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

[AndyOrch]

One judge interpretation...another judge on another day as you have seen from other threads can view it different.

 

When a district judge comes out with the line " only interested whether or not I took out the loan...not really interested in anything else" you have your work cut out as a litigant..if you was a solicitor she would react differently.

 

I have explained the reasoning for sending to the claimant during a claim...the Judge is wrong or rather inexperienced as to how some debt collectors solicitors work.

 

Sounds like your judge wasn't really interest in anything and wanted to get you in and out as quick as possible

[newdad]

lol....yes, when she said that I thought 'hmm, not the best of starts, I might just give it a miss telling her I want costs awarded"...lol

 

yes, she'd just heard a long family case and probably wasn't in the mood to debate anything...

 

..re. sending paperwork to the claimant,

I totally agree with you but wasn't prepared to tell the judge

"I'm sorry your honour but I do believe you are talking out of your ****"....lol...........

 

still, I never denied owing it, just begrudge having to pay interest and legal fees etc, so in many ways it was a result for me!

[AndyOrch]

Nobody ever denies owing it...they begrudge paying fleecing DCAs who have bought it for 10p in the £1 when the OC has already claimed tax relief against the initial debt and wrote it off..Defending a claim simply challenges them using the CCA1974 that they have complied with the process....its not about getting out of it on technicalities.... technicalities for defending...but legislation ignored when its the claimant.

 

Thats why we have the CCA1974.....but only 3% of judges actually refer or go by it.

 

Absolutely a good result you have just reduced their profit on their investment

 

Rant over

[DonJohnson89]

Hi Guys,

 

Newbie here. Congrats on getting a semi-win, one question I have after reading the judgement is that how can a DJ say she is not interested in the technicalities when that is what our legal system is built upon, we have rules for a reason and if they just ignore them what is the point in having them?

[dx100uk]

there isn't one don

its called judge lottery.

happens sometimes!!